Category: faith

President Vladimir Putin is on the opposite side of the United States and Europe. He has now placed himself in opposition to the public protests and appeals of the Orthodox Churches. A head of state aspiring to lead the Orthodox world can not defy the consensus of Orthodox leaders worldwide.

Russia needs to put an end to the war by agreeing to a ceasefire and ceasing from disrupting the lives of people in Ukraine. As has been written before on this blog, a resolution should be bases on a land for peace basis. Russia should withdraw from Ukrainian territory in exchange for NATO agreeing not install bases in Ukrainian and making Ukraine a member of NATO.

The danger exists of escalation with American and Russian forces possibly confronting one another. On the American side, it should be understood that the dangerous rhetoric over the years directed at the Russians has contributed to the war. On the Russian side, it should be understood that the invasion of Ukraine led to the suffering of innocent people who bear no responsibility for the geopolitical rivalry that was instigated by the west.

Orthodox Christians should strive for and end to the war in fulfillment of the established positions of the synods of the local Churches. It should also be understood that the Ukrainian Orthodox Church has condemned the invasion. The war must end and negotiations should proceed.

Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew opposes the war in Ukraine. The Patriarchs of Alexandria, Jerusalem, Rumania, Bulgaria, and Georgia have spoken out as well. The Archbishop of the Czeck Lands and Slovakia has spoken out. Archbishop Ieronymos of Athens has also spoken out. I may inadvertently have left other leaders out. In one form or another Orthodox leaders have raised their voices either to condemn the war outright or to urge President Putin to cease all military actions.

The voices of such a large portion of the Church cannot and should not be ignored. The most important plea for an end to the invasion of Ukraine came from Metropolitan Onuphry of Kiev who is the spiritual leader of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. This is the canonical Church under the Russian Orthodox Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia.

Patriarch Kyril of Moscow has been widely criticized for making a vague statement regarding the war. At this point, it is too early to judge and criticize. Patriarch Kyril made a statement very early on when it was unclear what was happening and why. Why should there be criticism for a a statement that was carefully guarded and restrained before all the facts were out?

As the war has progressed it is becoming increasingly difficult to justify Russian actions. Especially when Orthodox Christians are suffering. The religion of people in a war should not make a difference since we are all people. As it stands there are still many uncertainties and unknown factors.

Morally, Orthodox Christians should oppose the war. Not just this war but wars in general. Politics is clouding the issues here because factually the “international community” hates Russia. To bring about an end to the hostilities diplomacy must be given a chance to work.

The Orthodox Church could have the most significant influence on ending the war and its voice should be considered welcome by the world. President Putin is a churchgoer who has made pilgrimages to Jerusalem and Mount Athos. There are reports that two hundred Russian priests are calling on the President to stop bombing Ukraine.

During the winter of 1996 there were pro democracy demonstrations in Belgrade, Serbia against the rule of President Slobodon Milosovic. The demonstrators were blessed by the late Serbian Patriarch Pavle. The Serbian Orthodox Church and other Serbian groups wanted peace in the former Yugoslavia and were willing to help remove Milosovic.

What the Church and the Serbs wanted was to ensure that Kosovo would remain part of Serbia. The United States and its leaders such as Bill Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Richard Holbrooke, and Wesley Clarke preferred to destroy Serbia. Before the beginning of hostilities in 1999, Undersecretary of State Holbrooke presented the Serbs with a plan for “peace”. The plan would have required the Serbs to give up Kosovo after three years.

They knew the Serbs would not sign such a plan. They wanted to destroy Serbia. There are important similarities between Serbia and Russia. Kosovo was the spiritual center of Orthodox Serbia with its glorious Churches and Monasteries. Kiev is the birthplace of Orthodox Russia.

It is of extreme importance that the voice of the Orthodox Church be heard by all sides. As a son of the Church, President Putin should demonstrate his piety by ending the war. The west should cease and desist its hostile propaganda and military actions (NATO) against Russia.

Even more importantly, the west should give up trying to export LGBT to Orthodox countries. A member of British intelligence has said the campaign against Russia is about gay and transgender rights! People like this should have nothing to do with the sensitive issue of the war.

Just as President Putin should grant the requests of the Orthodox Churches and stop the war, the west should respect and acknowledge the Orthodox Churches. For decades western culture has promoted secularism in the name of pushing faith into private life.

The power and influence of Orthodoxy in Russia and Ukraine may very well be the key to restoring peace in the Russian and Ukrainian lands. This is assuming that the west has better intentions toward Russia than it had for Serbia.

Nearly one thousand years ago, the western Crusaders were on their way to the holy land when they were passing through Constantinople. Previous to this, Emperor Alexios Comnenos sent a message to the Pope requesting that mercenaries be sent to Constantinople to help recover territory that had been lost to the Turks in 1071. What the Emperor got to his horror were 100,000 crazed religious fanatics from western Europe.

Pope Urban had completely distorted the Emperor’s original intent. The Emperor had asked for mercenaries to recover territory in Anatolia since the Turks posed a threat to the Empire as a whole. The Pope had fantasies about liberating Jerusalem and so illiterate and uneducated Latin fanatics signed up for the Crusade which was something entirely different from what the Greeks wanted.

A discussion was had between the Greek Orthodox Emperor and the leaders of the Crusades. The Crusades were bloodthirsty and insisted that killing Muslims for Jerusalem would result in the remission of their sins. The Emperor insisted that murder was a sin no matter the religion of the victim.

The Emperor pointed out that the Christian Empire of the Greeks only waged war for defensive purposes. Since the Turks controlled large portions of Anatolia, the security of the Empire was under threat. The Emperor also suggested that the wars of the Empire were imperial wars, not religious wars. Orthodoxy does not have holy wars.

The Crusaders had entirely different views. The Greeks cited the canon of Saint Basil (a part of Orthodox canon law) in which a soldier who has killed in times of war is denied communion for a period of two or three years. This is not to suggest that a Christian soldier sinned by doing his duty to his country, but the Church recognizes that enemy soldiers are people created in the image of God.

Debates could be held about the righteousness of the Greek War of Independence, World War Two, and other conflicts. Circumstances vary and while the Roman Catholics have developed a doctrine for “just wars”, the Orthodox do not have the equivalent. Orthodoxy does not endorse war but recognizes that a country has a right to self defense as the Church in Byzantium recognized the Empire’s right to defend itself.

On the matter of Ukraine. The Russians should have probably restrained themselves and avoided invading Ukraine. Being anti war, I am inclined to suggest Russia may be in the wrong for invading Ukraine. However, the Russians made attempts at diplomacy and were rebuffed.

The Biden administration refused to recognize Russia’s security interests and concerns about being encircled by NATO. Therefore, the issue becomes somewhat blurred although the anti war position may have been the ideal strategy. What is beyond dispute is that war would not have started under a Trump administration.

The western world has a history of warmongering. A thousand years ago the Crusaders committed genocide against Muslims and Jews in the name of Christianity. Today, the Crusades come in the form of NATO and under the guise of democracy.

The United States and NATO have bombed Serbia, invaded Iraq, and engaged in war against Syria. These wars have led to the destruction of Eastern Christianity much as the Crusades led to the attack on Constantinople in 1204 which was left in devastation. The Biden administration like the Clinton and Bush administrations is intent on war.

Donald Trump was an attractive candidate mainly because of his anti war stance which in many ways resembled the position of the Christian Emperors of Constantinople. Anti war in principle but war when necessary and in self defense. The Clinton, Bush, and Biden administrations support ideological wars which is in the tradition of the Crusades. The neoconservatives and the neoliberals of today believe as the Crusaders did that the ends justify the means.

None have ever taken into account the misery of innocent people. From a Christian standpoint we should take into consideration the misery of ordinary people in Ukraine. They are the victims of the Russians to an extent, but they are more the victims of the west which exacerbated tensions.

Orthodox Church leaders have sent messages to President Putin asking for a cessation of hostilities. His beatitude Metropolitan Onuphry of Ukraine is among those who have asked for an end to the war. There should be a ceasefire and negotiations should begin between Washington, Kiev, and Moscow.

Washington needs to get rid of the arrogant view that it has the right to intervene anywhere in the world. The basis for peace should be that Ukraine maintain a neutral status outside of NATO in return for Russian withdrawal from occupied territories. Land for peace.

Being anti war and opposed to the invasion of Ukraine does not mean one does not sympathize with Russia. The Russians have serious grievances with the west. A permanent peace and reconciliation between Russia and the west is possible as demonstrated by the administration of Donald Trump.

The Trump administration did not provoke the Russians and there was never any war over Ukraine. If the hysteria emanating from the media and the Democratic Party had not made it impossible, America and Russia during the Trump years might have achieved a real and genuine peace.

What some of us feared from the Democrats has come to pass.

A Greek television station MEGA has been broadcasting a series on the life of Saint Paisios the Athonite (1924-1994). Saint Paisios is one of the most beloved Saints in the recent history of Orthodoxy. He was a holy and pious monk from Mount Athos who taught love and assisted anyone who sought his guidance. Miracles are said to have been attributed to him during his lifetime and after his death.

He was added to the list of Saints in 2015. Churches named for him have been built not only in Greece, but in Russia and Syria as well. His tomb outside Thessaloniki at the Monastery of Saint John the Theologian is a site of pilgrimage from throughout the Orthodox world.

Now, a secular Greek politician has proceeded to ridicule the series on Saint Paisios. Petros Tatsopoulos made one serious point but even that point was mangled by the insults and ridicule that he directed at Orthodox Christians. He suggested that the story of Saint Paisios cannot be considered historical. From the viewpoint of secular history and research this point is valid and in itself does not disrespect religious faith or the life of the Saint.

History is generally written through the prism of historians and researchers whose emphasis is on facts that can be proven in this world. Christian faith is not of this world and so the revelation of God is something that is beyond the scope and purposes of secular historians. The Church itself through the bishops, priests, theologians, and ecclesiastical historians have the task of examining the role of God in history and the world.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate recognized the Elder Paisios as a Saint in 2015. Under the influence of the holy spirit the works and miracles of Saint Paisios were recognized. Secular historians do not recognize divine miracles and it is not their purpose to pass judgement on matters of faith.

Many good secular historians have written about Christianity and other faiths with great respect. They have done so by explaining matters of faith. For example, the study of Byzantine history necessitates a knowledge of Orthodox faith and dogma. There are brilliant secular historians who have written about Byzantium and discussed the dogmas that were formulated by the Ecumenical Councils and Synods.

Now, returning to Tatsopoulos. Tatsopoulos does not do historians any favors by his comments. His attacks on the series depicting the life of Saint Paisios is motivated by ideology, not by his love of history. It is clear that like many officials of the Greek establishment that he is a secularist, an internationalist, and an ass.

His suggestion that Greece will not return to the middle ages is indicative of his western and anti hellenic mindset. The middle ages he refers to have to with Western Europe. Of what does Greece have to do with Europe? Greece languished under the Turks for centuries and before that under the yoke of the Franks who invaded Constantinople and other Greek lands.

Greece is a mess today. Greece has a spiritual crisis as well an identity crisis. The Greek political elite mock the Orthodox faith of the Greeks and their beloved Saints while erasing Greece’s history from schools and subordinating Greek interests to that abomination known as the European Union.

Tatsopoulos is apparently a former Syriza official that has joined New Democracy. This is now the second time someone associated with Prime Minister Mitsotakis has ridiculed the faith of the Greek people. Last December, the Greek representative to the World Health Organization ridiculed the Mother of God.

The Prime Minister needs to distance himself from the enemies of Orthodoxy and Hellenism.

Patriarch Bartholomew has expressed concern that a third world war could break out over Ukraine. His concerns are valid and he is right to speak out and urge everyone to restrain themselves. The problem however is that he has no credibility.

Patriarch Bartholomew’s intervention in Ukraine effectively led to the Ecumenical Patriarchate aligning itself politically with Washington against Moscow. The Church became a political pawn in all this. As far as Russia is concerned, neither the Patriarch nor the Greek speaking world has any influence in Moscow.

Before the Ukraine crisis broke out the Greek Orthodox world had much influence in Russia. The Monasteries of Mount Athos were beloved by the Russians. When Elder Ephraim of Vatopaidi Monastery was arrested in Greece in 2011 the Russians were his biggest supporters.

Greek clerics and theologians once highly esteemed in Orthodoxy have lost their reputations because they sided with Constantinople in Ukraine. The Ecumenical Patriarchate has succeeded in conquering the Greek speaking Orthodox Churches but he has angered and alienated the rest of the Orthodox world.

The Church of Greece is now subjugated under Constantinople and falling into total ruin. The majority of bishops are afraid of challenging Patriarch Bartholomew’s un Orthodox teachings. The Church of Cyprus is divided. The Patriarchate of Alexandria is losing priests and faithful to the Russian exarchate.

Who now will listen to the Ecumenical Patriarchate? Without the Church crisis the Ecumenical Patriarch would have stood as an elder statesman of Orthodoxy. All the Orthodox respected him as being “first among equals”. Without the schism Patriarch Bartholomew could have used his office to serve as a bridge between Washington and Moscow.

This is now an impossible task with the Russians having been alienated and Orthodoxy divided for the foreseeable future. Anti war statements from the Ecumenical Patriarch are very much welcome but will fall on deaf ears in both Washington and Moscow. Moscow because of the Church schism and Washington because they have gotten what they needed from Patriarch Bartholomew and do not care what he has to say.

What a terrible situation when the world is headed for a horrific war the Orthodox Church remains divided. It is terrible to reflect that Constantinople divided the Orthodox Church.

From the time that the Church crisis began in September 2018, voices have called for the convening of a Pan Orthodox council to resolve the Church crisis in Ukraine. Orthodox primates such as Patriarch John of Antioch and Archbishop Anastasios of Albania have called for the convening of a council. Patriarch Bartholomew has repeatedly ruled out a council.

Two years ago, Patriarch Theophilos of Jerusalem made an attempt to convene a council. In light of the denunciation of the actions of the Patriarch of Jerusalem by the Ecumenical Patriarchate, the “council” was redefined as being a meeting or gathering. In total, six Orthodox Churches were gathered in Amman, Jordan under the auspices of the Patriarch of Jerusalem.

Plans have been announced for the convening of a council that would include no more than five local Churches to gather and this time the topic is not Constantinople’s intervention in Ukraine, but the establishment of a Russian exarchate in Africa on the territory of the Patriarchate of Alexandria.

The five local Churches invited are the four ancient Patriarchates (Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem) and the Church of Cyprus. There is respect and reverence that is due to the ancient Patriarchates which is why I do not believe the order of Churches in the dyptychs should ever be changed. The ancient Patriarchates were established by the fathers and the Ecumenical Councils and so are to an extent a part of tradition.

The ancient Patriarchates are entitled to maintain their places of honor at the top (or near the top) of the ranking of Churches. They are entitled to nothing more than that. The Church of Russia is the largest Orthodox Church. The Churches of Serbia, Bulgaria, Rumania, Georgia, and Greece are much bigger than the ancient Patriarchates and have much larger flocks.

Therefore, a council that excludes Churches that represent the overwhelming majority of Orthodox Christians is pointless. But then again Patriarch Bartholomew has no desire to convene a serious council that will seriously examine the Ukrainian crisis honestly. The plans to discuss the Russian exarchate in Africa is also an attempt to distract from Ukraine which is what started all the chaos.

No council can be convened that does not include the participation of all autocephalous Orthodox Churches. The Amman gathering in 2020 was flawed specifically because more than half of the Churches were not represented. Still, the Amman gathering was a noble first attempt to begin the process of getting plans for a council off the ground.

The plans for the upcoming gathering of the five Churches is not only flawed because it seeks to ignore the the universal Church. It is flawed because it is also being convened with less than honorable intentions. It is intent on attacking the Russian Church over Africa while ignoring the mess that Constantinople started in Ukraine.

A real council needs to be held that will represent the universal Church that lives in today’s reality. A council of the ancient Patriarchates and Cyprus is inadequate to address the Church crisis or any other contemporary issue. Patriarch Bartholomew would have the right to make his case in a council attended by ALL Churches as would the Russian Church.

Therefore, no Orthodox Christian can accept the forthcoming gathering and any decisions to be made with any seriousness.

Patriarch Theophilos of Jerusalem has been raising the alarm about the dangers facing the Christian populations of the holy land. Activities from right wing Israeli settler groups appear to threaten the existence of Christians in the holy land. A show of support for the Jerusalem Patriarchate is coming from the Russian Church.

Patriarch Kyril of Moscow has expressed his support for the Patriarchate of Jerusalem and has reacted to the recent message of the Patriarch by expressing the full support of the Russian Church. It should be remembered that the Russian government and Church played significant roles in saving the Patriarchate of Antioch from destruction. We have therefore a potential model for how relations between the Russian Church and the ancient Patriarchates should be conducted.

Jerusalem is enjoying warm ties with Russia. Jerusalem has always had warm ties with Russia. This can be seen by the references by priests in the Russian Church to Jerusalem as the “mother of Churches.” The Amman synod conducted two years ago under the auspices of the Patriarch of Jerusalem as a means of addressing the Ukrainian schism showed the Patriarch of Jerusalem as a statesman in Orthodoxy.

Jerusalem maintains the traditional Orthodox calendar. It is close with the Russians. The Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR) has a presence in the holy land and has always been friendly with the Patriarchate of Jerusalem. Jerusalem and Antioch have excellent relations with the Russian Church.

Constantinople and Alexandria could learn from Antioch and Jerusalem. The Russians respect the ancient status of Antioch and Jerusalem, as they do Constantinople and Alexandria. If the latter two were to be satisfied with their honorary statuses the schism could be healed.

Jerusalem and Antioch are respected because of their moral stances and the way they relate to other Churches (especially Moscow). Constantinople’s arrogance and Alexandria’s treachery have been very costly for those Patriarchal sees. They regain their honor when they regain their humility.

At a time when the world is in chaos from omicron and human suffering is increasing because of this pandemic and because of the pressure and strain from lockdowns and restrictions, the Orthodox Church is mired in ecclesiastical disputes. To be sure, Patriarch Bartholomew has the ultimate responsibility for the schism. But the Russian Church has escalated the crisis by creating an exarchate in Africa at the expense of the Alexandrian Patriarchate.

The Orthodox Church is the true Church. The problem is the world does not know this. The fact that the Church is in a near schism does not help matters and weakens its witness in the present world. Patriarch Bartholomew is not likely to be reasonable any time soon. The Russian Church could at least put a freeze on its activities in Africa pending an easing of the health crisis around the world.

Archbishop Anastasios of Albania has commented on the escalating division in Orthodoxy. The Archbishop has reminded us that he predicted with the passing of time the schism would more likely become permanent. Metropolitan Serapheim of Greece has also commented and suggested that the Russian Church should not consider Alexandria in schism as that local Church has not been condemned by a council.

Considering the great crisis that omicron poses the Churches might consider concentrating more on teaching the gospel at this time and leaving the crisis on the side temporarily. The Russian Church happens to be in the right but should suspend its African undertaking for the purpose of emphasizing the necessity of combating omicron and providing relief.

As a result of the pandemic, Orthodoxy has the opportunity to bring light in to a darkened world by practicing the gospel and sharing the faith with a suffering world. Furthermore, theologians should rise to the occasion to address the sins of science in the twenty first century. The funding provided by western scientists to the Wuhan lab raises moral questions that theologians and the Church generally must address.

The misbehavior of scientists is a challenge to faith. The Church should focus on confronting the scientific community for its crimes against humanity. Over five million people around the world are dead. Churches were closed two years ago, and might again conceivably close.

The opportunity is at hand to condemn the evils wrought by secular and anti Christian scientists and to provide witness of the light of Christ in a time of darkness. The Orthodox Church must come together at this crucial time.

Patriarch Bartholomew often discusses climate change and global warming. Perhaps he should take an interest in gain of function research and the catastrophic results it has had for man, God’s most favored creation? Perhaps all Orthodox Churches can also condemn the soft genocide against the Ughyurs?

The term “byzantine” is frequently used to denote intrigue and treachery. In Constantinople, factions schemed against one another and there were numerous Emperors that were murdered or blinded. The ugliness of the fallen world and the crimes perpetrated in the Empire of New Rome does not diminish the sanctity of religious life in Constantinople. Cathedrals and Monasteries were built, and holy fathers and saints continued to work for the glory of God throughout the Empire.

What are we to make of the intrigue and factionalism in Orthodoxy today? The Emperors could be excused to an extent because they resided in the secular world. Critics of Byzantium cite the intrigue in the Empire but let’s be serious. There is not a single civilization or country that has ever been exempt from the realities of a sinful and corrupt world. America for example has made it a practice to bomb and invade other countries.

The Russian Empire like its Byzantine predecessor had its own sins but this did not mean that the Russian Empire was not a force for good. The primates, hierarchs, and clergy of the Orthodox Church have left the secular world and so the kind of intrigue that was in many ways understandable in Byzantium, is not so understandable within the Church of God. What would the apostles and the fathers of the Church think today?

The blame for the present crisis in Eastern Orthodoxy lies with Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew. The Patriarchal invasion of the canonical territory of the Russian Church in 2018 is the source of all subsequent bitterness, instability, and factionalism that plagues Orthodoxy. As the rivalry between the ancient Patriarchate of Alexandria and the Russian Orthodox Church heats up, Patriarch Bartholomew watches with indifference.

It is with horror and revulsion that I have been watching the schism gradually widen. The members of the Russian Orthodox Church and its daughter Church in Ukraine are brothers and sisters in the lord. The Ukrainian faithful have been persecuted for the last several years because they refuse to abandon the canonical Church for an artificially created entity brought into being in order to satisfy secular politicians in Kiev and Washington.

I happen to love the great Church of Constantinople. It is with horror that I have watched the Ecumenical Patriarch work with the anti Orthodox establishment in Washington to hurt the Russian Church. The actions of Constantinople are shameful and deplorable.

We are seeing the Russian Church establish an exarchate in Africa at the expense of the Patriarchate of Alexandria. I have mixed views as to the appropriateness of this action. What is absolutely certain is that if Patriarch Theodore had not emulated the example of Patriarch Bartholomew in Ukraine then the Russians would not now be in Africa. It should be emphasized that the Russians have always respected the boundaries of the ancient Patriarchates and treated them with honor.

The Greek speaking Orthodox Churches have adopted policies that contravene Orthodox ecclesiology. The synod of the Church of Greece and the Archbishop of Cyprus for reasons still unverified followed the destructive path set by Patriarch Bartholomew. The entire Ukrainian affair is not about healing the Church schism in that country. It is about destruction.

What good has come from any of this? We have the estrangement of Constantinople from Moscow. The estrangement of Alexandria from Moscow. The estrangement of the Greek Churches from their sister Churches.

Even the reputation of Mount Athos has suffered because a few Abbots inexplicably joined Patriarch Bartholomew’s anti Russian campaign. This is destruction and madness. The only way out is through repentance and the convening of an ecumenical council.

This byzantine intrigue has to end. The Ecumenical Patriarch is universally recognized as “first among equals”. Beyond a “primacy of honor” he has no rights or privileges.

Based on the continued deterioration in inter Orthodox relations it is apparent that the most logical way to defuse this crisis is to depose Patriarch Bartholomew. This can only be averted through repentance on the part of the Ecumenical Patriarch.

The world has enough problems. Washington is provoking Russia again in Ukraine. The omicron variant is infecting people around the world. Transgenderism, infanticide, and gay radicalism are threatening the influence of Christianity in the western world.

The purpose of the Orthodox Church is to baptize the nations. The world is in darkness and needs the light of Jesus Christ. This inter Orthodox fighting is detrimental to the Church’s sacred mission.

The year 2021 was not a perfect year. It was however a much better year than 2020. Here is hoping that 2022 brings about the following,

1) The pandemic becomes an endemic meaning that covid will be like the flu. It will never go away but we will live normally. The media report conflicting information. The World Health Organization says the pandemic is on its way to becoming an endemic. Let’s hope the scientists do not move the goal post again and may we be able to live fully normal lives again.

2) The schism in Orthodoxy. May this be the year the Ukrainian schism is ended.

3) The Biden administration should come to its senses and leave Ukraine out of NATO. This is the basis for peace.

4) Last but not least. May this be the year that Cyprus was freed from the Turkish occupation.